Upon further consideration, is this even feasible for the Veloroomie regulars, based on the allotted time slot?

If I've got this right...

Saturday, March 21

8:00 am PST (Los Angeles)

11:00 am EST (New York)

3:00 pm GMT (London, England)

4:00 pm GMT+1 (Berlin, Germany)

11:00 pm GMT+11 (Canberra, Australia)

If not, it could just inspire us to do something similar that better fits out collective schedules (or at least the schedules we've become accustomed to).

And maybe something without Liggett?

Curious to get reactions. I'm just very much encouraged that someone out there thought to put this in motion.

(The truth is, though: this is probably the worst time of day for me. It would pretty much eat up my entire afternoon, and the best daylight hours. So unless it's raining, I doubt I'll be around for this one. We'll see. A classic viewing of Paris-Roubaix in a few weeks could prove to be quite fun, though.)

I have already watched the full available coverage of Het Volk '97, '98, '99 '02 and '05, with '10 (today) '14, The Stannard show and '16 to follow. Most are on that cycling classics list, but here's what I have found so far:

The more I think about this, it could really gain some traction. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a lot Twitter buzz around this. If done right, you could even have various pros chiming in...and Liggett, too.

It sure would be interesting, on some of these classic editions, if some of the participants from that time weighed in. There's actually a lot potential here for fun, and a bit of relief from a failed season.

Another big plus for some of us: No failing live-feeds or unexpected drops in coverage.

With so many cycling fans, eager to satisfy their cravings, looking to the vast library of past races, will it occur to pros that what they do is somewhat replaceble in terms of entertainment? I mean, we could easily subsist on a diet of vintage races from the past for more than just a few seasons.

Seriously. It's not all that difficult for me to imagine a radical paradigm shift where cycling fans around the world coalesce around the very idea that sparked this thread. For many, it would be a great history lesson while providing some important context to the races, and racers, of today. For most, it would provide plenty of excitement and entertainment, even with a foregone conclusion, as it's easy to forget just what transpired, and how.

I suppose it could be even better without spoilers—for those who don't know the outcome, or have simply forgotten—but that might be harder to pull off. I had a bit of that experience the last time I watched The Hell of the North a few month ago. I had completely forgotten who the winner was going to be.

Pro athletes are often plagued with an infuriating sense of inflated self-worth, so I wonder if this current pandemic might remind everyone of the relative insignificance of what they offer the world—especially in relation to the vast sums of money that many of them are paid. If they're not careful, they might find sports becoming the equivalent of classical music. People will still go the symphony, year after year, to listen famous compositions that they've already listened to countless times. Or maybe a more accurate analogy would be that of listen to your favorite albums, or watching your favorite movies. Hollywood could cease to create content tomorrow, and generations of viewers could still be entertained by the already-existing catalogue.

Of course there's something unique and special about watching events live, with all the unknowns and excitement associated with that, but it could also be argued that watching only games, races, matches, etc, that have already been deemed "classics" might be preferable to sitting through countless versions of live events that often turn out to be a complete waste of time.

I suppose it could be even better without spoilers—for those who don't know the outcome, or have simply forgotten—but that might be harder to pull off. I had a bit of that experience the last time I watched The Hell of the North a few month ago. I had completely forgotten who the winner was going to be.

Hey, the other day I wasn't even certain who won the Omloop.And that was less than three weeks ago!

But if you haven't listened to Johan reflecting on his past experiences in cycling, then you're missing out on one of the most compelling perspectives you are likely to ever come across. Remove Lance's goofiness from the equation, and Hincapie almost always has some very unique first-hand insights to offer as well. He tends to share things that only those on the inside are ever privy to, which makes his contributions all the more rare and valuable.

I'm not exactly clear on the "whens" and "hows" of all this yet, but I suspect that will all get sorted in the next few days.

Distance yourself from people around you but stick with us - we won't let a pandemic stop us from bringing you the classics in April. Bust the lockdown boredom - lock-in these times to share the action with us and fans around Australia.

They shared extended highlights of the three races, while offering commentary over the otherwise-silent footage. If you want some insight that you simply won't find anywhere else, then do yourself the favor. If you've ever wondered what it might be like to view these races in the company of those who have actually participated, then this is likely as close as you'll ever come, unless you're well connected. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I find no problem in simply putting the past aside, and taking in the knowledge. I hope you can, too. It was fun.

Our look back at some memorable editions of Paris-Roubaix. The guys review the 1994 and 2005 editions and bring in a special guest to discuss his day. George breaks down a rather unfortunate crash and equipment fail.

I just finished watching this. I didn't enjoy it as much as the previous episode that covered Flanders, but it was still interesting. What made the recap of The Ronde so cool was the direct comparison of the same sections of road, but between the three featured years of 1985, 1995 and 2005—which are really different eras, given the evolution of equipment alone.

For Paris-Roubaix they only compared two versions, 1994 and 2005, but I had to remind myself of what I was doing in 1994, as it doesn't seem all that long ago to me. But watching the footage...Damn. I felt like I was watching '84 or '74. You don't realize just how much things change over the decades until you look back. '94 was Hincapie's first attempt at Roubaix, which was won that year by Andrei Tchmil.

The surprise guest in the middle of this episode is an interview with the '94 winner himself. Some of you may enjoy that. It's done in French, between Johan and Andrei, but with good subtitles. It's quite nice, actually.

The other featured edition, 2005, was the year that Hincapie placed 2nd to Tom Boonen, with none other than Juan Antonio Flecha rounding out the podium in third.

As I said, I found the historical look at The Ronde to be a bit more compelling than this episode, and I probably would've liked to hear a bit more from Johan, as he usually has the most insightful commentary. But Hincapie obviously has plenty to offer on the subject as well.

Next week they'll be doing a similar format to look back at some classic editions of the Amstel Gold race. I'm guessing they'll include 2001 when Lance came in second to Erik Dekker in a two-man sprint to the finish? But we'll see.

Time to look back at the Best of Amstel Gold. The guys start with the 1999 edition, a race that saw Lance and Michael Boogerd take it right to the finish. Boogerd joins the crew to talk about his victory and how the sprint unfolded.

We then beak down both the mens and women's exciting finishes from 2019. The crew closes the show with their thoughts on a revised cycling calendar due to COVID-19.

I just finished viewing this, and I would highly recommend it. The audio quality isn't very good, and Hincapie's contributions are only very minimal, but the highlight is the feature with Michael Boogerd. He beat Lance in a two-man sprint to the line in 1999, and it's really interesting, as well as entertaining, to listen to the two of them reflect upon that.

Then, of course, they cover the now-legendary performance of the Mighty, Mighty van der Poel from the 2019 edition. There's mostly shared amazement among the panel, and Bruyneel (as usual) has some interesting points to offer. All-in-all, I found it well worth my time.

The 1999 race coverage begins @7:10The Boogered interview is from 20:25 to 33:40The 2019 edition is from 34:20 to 55:00.The final 15 minutes is an interesting discussion about the immediate future of pro cycling, with some interesting suggestions as to what should unfold for the rest of this year.

I finally got through the latest installment from Lance & Co. Very poor audio quality, but some interesting moments.

THEMOVE 2020 Best ofLiège-Bastogne-Liège

Quote

THEMOVE rounds out the Spring Classics with a recap of Liege. We tackle the 1987 and 2009 battles and bring in two special guests, Stephen Roche and Andy Schleck.

Stephen talks about how a second place finish catapulted him to his best season of his career. Schleck joins the group to talk about his solo breakaway and Monument victory.

I was mostly unmoved by the second part of this with Andy, although some may find the insight interesting. The most entertaining part, IMO, was the interview with Stephen Roche from 18:21 to 31:10. That link starts with Roche's post-race interview from 1987 before he joins Lance, Johan and George for a very charming exchange. It was quite nice.